2008 (2) TMI 152

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the refund claim on the ground of unjust enrichment. 2. The relevant facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of sponge iron classifiable under Chapter 72 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. Vide Notification No. 16/2004 dated 28-2-2004 rate of duty was reduced from @ 16% Adv. to 8% Adv. The appellant cleared the goods on budget d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....T. 355 (P & H). He also relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Belgaum v. Gokak Mills Ltd. reported in 2007 (212) E.L.T. 56 (T-B). 4. Ld. DR on behalf of the Revenue reiterates the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals). He submits that the credit notes are not sufficient to establish that the duty incidence has not been passed to any person. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assessee to get over the bar of unjust enrichment under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944?" The Tribunal in the case of Gokak Mills Ltd. (supra) held that the assessee is eligible for refund when the credit note issued by the assessee but the transaction was on provisionality and the amounts were settled in the end and higher payment made by the assessee. In the instant case, I find t....